Just purchased a Conquest 3.5-10X w/RZ 800 reticle for my big game stick. Overwhelmingly, I chose it for its reticle and only for that reason. I have been well-satisifed with various Leupolds and a previous generation Nikon 3.3-10 X44 but wanted the speed of multi-stadia reticle for 400 + yd shots. The game doesn't always seem to want to wait for turrets to turn. On my Vari X III's and the aforementioned Nikon I have added Stoney Point (Leupold) or used the midrise turret which came on the Nikon to tape yardage marks which were arrived at by range testing to 800 yds at the Sac Valley Shooting Center. Agree very closely with the online ballistic program, corrected for altitude that I use. The Nikon is a mil-dot and I use it to holdover for distances where I know that will work. (Like 400 yds on my 22-250 Ackley sending 75 gr Amax at 3250.) The Rapid Z (PF) system appealed to me, especially as it lines up beautifully for my 270 WSM/ 140 Berger loads at my normal shooting altitude of 5500 ft. (66 gr 7828, F215 M Match, WW 2.825" OAL 3170 fps) Tested it today and its near perfect out to 600 yds. (Far as I tried today.) Here's the bad news, however... my Nikon has better glass. That's good and bad news, I guess, since I have the scopes on two rifles, but I am dissapointed that the Zeiss glass is not "more wondrous" as it cost twice the $$s or nearly so. I am even more convinced now that shooters are as influenced by marketing hype and "brand" as the rest of the consumer world. Not bitter, the Zeiss is a fine scope but now know (at least in my example) no better "optically" than another product which cost a lot less. As i type this and the sun is going down, I have both pointing at a hillside behind my place to see what changes as it gets darker. I "hope" the Nikon doesn't resolve detail longer than the Deutch product, but that won't surprise me!